![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Are all the Seinfeld quotes really necessary? The section summaries seem to do a sufficient job describing the holiday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.180.224.100 ( talk) 10:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Is this really notable and important enough to deserve being featured on the main page's "On This Day"? — Nova Dog — ( contribs) 00:45, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
"This "In popular culture" section may contain minor or trivial references. Please reorganize this content to explain the subject's impact on popular culture rather than simply listing appearances, and remove trivial references. (December 2011)"
Jeeze guys, lighten up. The article is about a humor subject and the whole thing is trivial so mentions are proper. Keith Henson ( talk) 20:32, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
If it belongs in the article at all, I don't think it belongs in the lede since it is unsupported elsewhere in the article:
-- Ronz ( talk) 17:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Should the lede read "Festivus is a secular holiday celebrated on December 23 as a way to commemorate the holiday season without participating in its pressures and commercialism,[1] although the holiday rapidly became commercialised as it grew in popularity[2]." or "Festivus is a secular holiday celebrated on December 23 as a way to commemorate the holiday season without participating in its pressures and commercialism,[1]." ? 89.100.150.198 ( talk) 18:17, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Should the sentence "It has also been described as a parody and as playful consumer resistance, [1]" appear in the lede of the article, in the third paragraph of the introduction, or not at all. Randy Kryn 19:31 6-1-'12
Support for third paragraph. An editor has added "parody" to the lede, citing an online paper which also includes the words "playful consumer resistance" in the title. The lede describes the intent and definition of the holiday, and seems fine as it stands, for the holiday has evolved past the Seinfeld show into a life of its own focused on the non-commercial aspect of the holiday. To give equal weight to the word "parody" seems to diminish the holiday's purpose. Putting additional opinions as definitions in the third paragraph may work (although the editor also wanted to add the definition "anti-holiday", which was how one person, Jason Alexander, defined the premise of the Seinfeld episode and not the ensuing holiday.). This article isn't about the Seinfeld episode as much as it is about the ensuing holiday, probably a unique event in holiday evolution, and to give equal weight to the word "parody" would, in essence, redefine an already established holiday. Randy Kryn 19:39 6-1-'12
My recent removal of a trivia section was reverted without discussion on this talk page, although the reverter was kind enough to leave me note saying he'd reverted "because it didn’t appear constructive".
From Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections, "Sections with lists of miscellaneous information (such as "trivia" sections) should be avoided as an article develops. Such information is better presented in an organized way."
The removed material can easily be located in the history here if anyone wants to work it into the article meaningfully.
I've re-reverted pending discussion, but will not do so again.
124.168.221.199 ( talk) 04:19, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Of course a section should be there, notwithstanding its name. The entire data chain of recognized major media sources and governments acknowledging the holiday and its secular nature is a self-evident keeper. Randy Kryn 11:21 31 December 2012
A parody holiday is a holiday that imitates or mocks a real holiday. Festivus does not even come close to fitting this description. Festivus does not imitate Christmas or the other December holidays because its purpose is completely different. Its purpose is to be a different holiday for those who are frustrated with commercialism. The term "secular holiday" covers all holidays not associated with a specific religion or denomination. More common secular holidays would include New Year's Day and Independence Day. Festivus more appropriately falls under the category of "Secular holidays" because it is separate from Christmas and the other December holidays, and it is not a religious holiday. Frank Anchor Talk 02:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
A parody holiday is a holiday that imitates or mocks a real holiday.
I think your recent edits are perfict. The current version of "Festivus" states:
I'm sorry that some don't like this wording, but it's impossible for them to make reasonable arguments against it since it is factually correct. It simply can not be argued that "Festivus" did not start out (at least "In Popular Culture") as a parody, because that would not be true. As we well know, in virtually everyone's conciousness, "Festivus" *did* start out as a parody on a well-known comedy sitcom. Folks, please accept the reality that this current wording is a very good comprimise, and accuratly reflects the actual real truth in a factual way. For folks to argue that "Festivus" *did not* start out as a parody simply undermines their credibility on this point.
I think that this compramise is good middle ground that should satisfy both ends of the opinion spectrum. The current wording establishes the popularity of this "holiday" as becomming popular as a parody on a well known television comedy program, while also telling us that there are some who have folded this parody into their secular rituals as well. Folks, it will not get any better than this, Randy Kryn has crafted great language that should satsify all but the most deluded of ideologs. =//= Johnny Squeaky 23:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
The article mentions "writer Dan O'Keefe," and then refers to "the elder O'Keefe" without giving any explanation of who that might be. Who is the elder O'Keefe? 50.149.25.27 ( talk) 05:53, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
The New York Times article gets the names of father and son completely wrong. Daniel is the father, editor and author, who invented the holiday. Dan is the son, the Seinfeld writer, who later wrote the book The Real Festivus (2005), which should actually be the authority for this article, not the misinformation from various other sources. Softlavender ( talk) 07:38, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
That should be mentioned in the Article. 194.90.244.58 ( talk) 12:20, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Overall, this is a good article, and it approaches a funny topic with appropriate encyclopedic seriousness. However, it could be tightened up a bit. The two generations of both O'Keefes and Constanzas causes a little confusion, and some of the stuff about Festivus history and tradition is repeated unnecessarily. But overall, a fun read. PurpleChez ( talk) 19:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Sen. Rand Paul and Sen. Cory Booker used Festivus as a theme in a twitter conversation including airing grievances about the government and a challenge of wrestling as a feat of strength. Here is the link: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/rand-paul-airs-festivus-grievances — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6014:1C:2085:9A0B:ABFD:802B ( talk) 21:07, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
This edit pins Festivus to the Dec. 23 date and removed content related to Elon University's Festivus celebration in April. Candleabracadabra ( talk) 02:13, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
A Seinfeld promotional video (seen on Hulu) features a Festivus song. Can we add this in? 24.236.70.18 ( talk) 01:15, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Since it appears Festivus was a sort of put down on the Commerciliasation of Christmas,As mentioned in article.Isnt there a danger of it Festivus becoming commercilized as well? Eddson storms ( talk) 05:36, 16 December 2016 (UTC)Thanks!
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Festivus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Festivus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:39, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
I removed some text about the etymology of Festivus, on the grounds that the sources were simply dictionary entries, thus making this WP:OR. I would ask editors to review this policy before editing. Wikipedia is interested in verifiability not truth so even if the stated text is absolutely true, that does not of itself warrant inclusion in the article. Ashmoo ( talk) 08:08, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
I just found this page. Ashmoo, you miss the point: the new meaning does NOT derive from the older meaning, and my father specifically said it did not - but differentiating between previous meanings and the newly created one seems relevant, even under the arcane guidelines of this institution. As Randy points out, in articles on other holidays, etymology is considered valid. Thank you, Randy. DanOKeefe ( talk) 14:59, 23 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanOKeefe ( talk • contribs) 14:54, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
User:DanOKeefe, who purports to be the Seinfeld writer discussed in this article, has contributed 25 edits to it. KalHolmann ( talk) 17:40, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Are Newsweek headlines often (or even sometimes) in all caps? Because if so, the headline should be changed to initial caps. It's just too obtrusive, and many periodical have all-caps headlines as a matter of course (NYT, and hundreds of others); that doesn't mean we render them all caps. Softlavender ( talk) 12:03, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 |
Are all the Seinfeld quotes really necessary? The section summaries seem to do a sufficient job describing the holiday. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.180.224.100 ( talk) 10:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
Is this really notable and important enough to deserve being featured on the main page's "On This Day"? — Nova Dog — ( contribs) 00:45, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
"This "In popular culture" section may contain minor or trivial references. Please reorganize this content to explain the subject's impact on popular culture rather than simply listing appearances, and remove trivial references. (December 2011)"
Jeeze guys, lighten up. The article is about a humor subject and the whole thing is trivial so mentions are proper. Keith Henson ( talk) 20:32, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
If it belongs in the article at all, I don't think it belongs in the lede since it is unsupported elsewhere in the article:
-- Ronz ( talk) 17:17, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Should the lede read "Festivus is a secular holiday celebrated on December 23 as a way to commemorate the holiday season without participating in its pressures and commercialism,[1] although the holiday rapidly became commercialised as it grew in popularity[2]." or "Festivus is a secular holiday celebrated on December 23 as a way to commemorate the holiday season without participating in its pressures and commercialism,[1]." ? 89.100.150.198 ( talk) 18:17, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Should the sentence "It has also been described as a parody and as playful consumer resistance, [1]" appear in the lede of the article, in the third paragraph of the introduction, or not at all. Randy Kryn 19:31 6-1-'12
Support for third paragraph. An editor has added "parody" to the lede, citing an online paper which also includes the words "playful consumer resistance" in the title. The lede describes the intent and definition of the holiday, and seems fine as it stands, for the holiday has evolved past the Seinfeld show into a life of its own focused on the non-commercial aspect of the holiday. To give equal weight to the word "parody" seems to diminish the holiday's purpose. Putting additional opinions as definitions in the third paragraph may work (although the editor also wanted to add the definition "anti-holiday", which was how one person, Jason Alexander, defined the premise of the Seinfeld episode and not the ensuing holiday.). This article isn't about the Seinfeld episode as much as it is about the ensuing holiday, probably a unique event in holiday evolution, and to give equal weight to the word "parody" would, in essence, redefine an already established holiday. Randy Kryn 19:39 6-1-'12
My recent removal of a trivia section was reverted without discussion on this talk page, although the reverter was kind enough to leave me note saying he'd reverted "because it didn’t appear constructive".
From Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trivia sections, "Sections with lists of miscellaneous information (such as "trivia" sections) should be avoided as an article develops. Such information is better presented in an organized way."
The removed material can easily be located in the history here if anyone wants to work it into the article meaningfully.
I've re-reverted pending discussion, but will not do so again.
124.168.221.199 ( talk) 04:19, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Of course a section should be there, notwithstanding its name. The entire data chain of recognized major media sources and governments acknowledging the holiday and its secular nature is a self-evident keeper. Randy Kryn 11:21 31 December 2012
A parody holiday is a holiday that imitates or mocks a real holiday. Festivus does not even come close to fitting this description. Festivus does not imitate Christmas or the other December holidays because its purpose is completely different. Its purpose is to be a different holiday for those who are frustrated with commercialism. The term "secular holiday" covers all holidays not associated with a specific religion or denomination. More common secular holidays would include New Year's Day and Independence Day. Festivus more appropriately falls under the category of "Secular holidays" because it is separate from Christmas and the other December holidays, and it is not a religious holiday. Frank Anchor Talk 02:55, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
A parody holiday is a holiday that imitates or mocks a real holiday.
I think your recent edits are perfict. The current version of "Festivus" states:
I'm sorry that some don't like this wording, but it's impossible for them to make reasonable arguments against it since it is factually correct. It simply can not be argued that "Festivus" did not start out (at least "In Popular Culture") as a parody, because that would not be true. As we well know, in virtually everyone's conciousness, "Festivus" *did* start out as a parody on a well-known comedy sitcom. Folks, please accept the reality that this current wording is a very good comprimise, and accuratly reflects the actual real truth in a factual way. For folks to argue that "Festivus" *did not* start out as a parody simply undermines their credibility on this point.
I think that this compramise is good middle ground that should satisfy both ends of the opinion spectrum. The current wording establishes the popularity of this "holiday" as becomming popular as a parody on a well known television comedy program, while also telling us that there are some who have folded this parody into their secular rituals as well. Folks, it will not get any better than this, Randy Kryn has crafted great language that should satsify all but the most deluded of ideologs. =//= Johnny Squeaky 23:02, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
The article mentions "writer Dan O'Keefe," and then refers to "the elder O'Keefe" without giving any explanation of who that might be. Who is the elder O'Keefe? 50.149.25.27 ( talk) 05:53, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
The New York Times article gets the names of father and son completely wrong. Daniel is the father, editor and author, who invented the holiday. Dan is the son, the Seinfeld writer, who later wrote the book The Real Festivus (2005), which should actually be the authority for this article, not the misinformation from various other sources. Softlavender ( talk) 07:38, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
That should be mentioned in the Article. 194.90.244.58 ( talk) 12:20, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Overall, this is a good article, and it approaches a funny topic with appropriate encyclopedic seriousness. However, it could be tightened up a bit. The two generations of both O'Keefes and Constanzas causes a little confusion, and some of the stuff about Festivus history and tradition is repeated unnecessarily. But overall, a fun read. PurpleChez ( talk) 19:52, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Sen. Rand Paul and Sen. Cory Booker used Festivus as a theme in a twitter conversation including airing grievances about the government and a challenge of wrestling as a feat of strength. Here is the link: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/rand-paul-airs-festivus-grievances — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:558:6014:1C:2085:9A0B:ABFD:802B ( talk) 21:07, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
This edit pins Festivus to the Dec. 23 date and removed content related to Elon University's Festivus celebration in April. Candleabracadabra ( talk) 02:13, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
A Seinfeld promotional video (seen on Hulu) features a Festivus song. Can we add this in? 24.236.70.18 ( talk) 01:15, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
Since it appears Festivus was a sort of put down on the Commerciliasation of Christmas,As mentioned in article.Isnt there a danger of it Festivus becoming commercilized as well? Eddson storms ( talk) 05:36, 16 December 2016 (UTC)Thanks!
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Festivus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:41, 31 December 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Festivus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 00:39, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
I removed some text about the etymology of Festivus, on the grounds that the sources were simply dictionary entries, thus making this WP:OR. I would ask editors to review this policy before editing. Wikipedia is interested in verifiability not truth so even if the stated text is absolutely true, that does not of itself warrant inclusion in the article. Ashmoo ( talk) 08:08, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
I just found this page. Ashmoo, you miss the point: the new meaning does NOT derive from the older meaning, and my father specifically said it did not - but differentiating between previous meanings and the newly created one seems relevant, even under the arcane guidelines of this institution. As Randy points out, in articles on other holidays, etymology is considered valid. Thank you, Randy. DanOKeefe ( talk) 14:59, 23 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanOKeefe ( talk • contribs) 14:54, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
User:DanOKeefe, who purports to be the Seinfeld writer discussed in this article, has contributed 25 edits to it. KalHolmann ( talk) 17:40, 22 August 2018 (UTC)
Are Newsweek headlines often (or even sometimes) in all caps? Because if so, the headline should be changed to initial caps. It's just too obtrusive, and many periodical have all-caps headlines as a matter of course (NYT, and hundreds of others); that doesn't mean we render them all caps. Softlavender ( talk) 12:03, 26 November 2018 (UTC)